Re: [Supertraining] Rotational training and the movement of the feet, hips and back

Interesting point. I was wondering if it would be easier to distinguish
the movement in terms of the kinetic chain and force. In the second type
of movement skill is derived by maximizing instantaneous velocity near
the end of the movement. In a boxer, as in your example, you are trying
to maximize instantaneous velocity (since the mass of the fist/arm/glove
is constant in terms of force) at the point of contact. So a skilled
kinetic chain applies force starting from the ground (umm - normally a
punch would start with ground force and then go to the hips, even a
quick one off a block, I think) and proceeds through to elbow extension.

The point is you are maximizing force or rate of force production (in
the case of the boxer) would be more accurate, since it also has to be
quick enough to land.

In the case of the stability rotation instantaneous velocity is less an
issue and overcoming strength is more an issue. You have to have enough
speed to get body position, it is true, but it is still more overcoming
the resistance offered by the opponent. Far more an absolute strength
issue than a velocity issue.

So rotational movements become quite easily applied to the Supertraining
model developed by Dr. Siff, if this mindset is developed. Within a base
of appropriate motor skills, work rotational movements for some balance
of speed, strength and endurance. It really isn't rocket science.

In my opinion doing a twisting movement while locking the lower body (as
in seated twists) is an inappropriate motor pattern for most sports and
activities. You could do it as a warm-up, but I don't see the point of
adding intensity to that movement.

Krista Scott-Dixon wrote:

> On Jan 11, 2008 6:17 AM, ben_richens <ben_richens@yahoo.co.uk
> <mailto:ben_richens%40yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > There seems to be a lot of disagreement with the role of the bodies
> > movement in rotational movements [...]
>
> One problem is that frequently people do not further disaggregate the
> *type* of rotation nor whether the sport calls for rotational mobility
> or stability (or both).
>
> For example, I can think of quite a basic distinction: the ability to
> produce rotational force in the torso versus the ability to hold the
> torso stable while it rotates. In the first case I am thinking of
> something like a twist, where the ribcage/shoulders turn away from the
> pelvis. This would be useful to train in athletes such as BJJ-ers, who
> may twist from the waist to execute a sweep such as an upa --
> essentially this begins as a kind of twisting situp, which the hip
> extension then follows.
>
> In the second case I am thinking of something like a boxer, who
> initiates a punch with the torso turning as a block, and the initial
> rotational drive coming from the hips. The shoulders/ribcage and
> pelvis stay relatively aligned at first. Another example would be a
> runner who needs to keep the torso/pelvis stable during unilateral
> movements (stepping a leg forward, driving an arm forward), or a
> swimmer who needs to keep from excessively flopping side to side in
> the water.
>
> This crude division can be further subdivided -- for example stability
> emerges from dynamic coordination of a shifting body, requiring a
> complex pattern of motor recruitment that may differ appreciably in
> degree and order or firing. Even if the torso is held generally stable
> it may be more efficient for an athlete to turn side to side a bit, or
> it may be more appropriate to keep the body as fixed as possible.
> Again, one must begin with a nuanced understanding of what demands
> occur.
>
> And this rudimentary 2-part distinction is also only for twists
> imagined as side to side -- in sport there are also other directional
> demands that occur, e.g. a twist as part of a throw, chop or golf
> swing can also involve a diagonal pattern as the arms move downwards
> or upwards.
>
> Thus movement is complex and various types of rotation can occur
> together (e.g. stability demands can be followed by force production
> demands -- a "torso block" twist can be followed by a twist from the
> waist) but it would be helpful to begin with an understanding of what
> demands are actually required.
>
> If we're using the basic 2-part scheme above, in my experience people
> need the second type more often, and training the first type
> inappropriately can often result in low back pain. McGill's research,
> for example, showed that the seated twist was one of the worst
> movements for exacerbating LBP. Additionally poor lumbopelvic control
> during motion (one component of which might be considered rotational
> stability) is correlated with LBP.
>
> Krista Scott-Dixon
> Toronto, ON
> kristascottdixon@gmail.com <mailto:kristascottdixon%40gmail.com>
>
> .
>
>

--
Keith Hobman
Saskatoon, CANADA

__._,_.___